The case confirms that where the only issue at trial is consent to sexual acts, pretext call evidence containing apologies does not require a direction on the standard of proof before use by the jury, provided there are no uncharged acts to which the apologies could attach. A 'joke' or 'bet' that proceeds upon a falsehood — that the defendant would not touch the complainant — cannot ground an honest and reasonable but mistaken belief in consent under s 24 of the Criminal Code (Qld), because any change in the complainant's position was brought about by the falsehood.
The full text is available to signed-in members.